{"id":95,"date":"2011-08-24T21:50:54","date_gmt":"2011-08-24T21:50:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.exunoplures.org\/main\/?page_id=95"},"modified":"2026-04-21T12:52:04","modified_gmt":"2026-04-21T16:52:04","slug":"sticky-terms","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.exunoplures.org\/main\/articles\/sticky-terms\/","title":{"rendered":"Sticky Terms: A Multiplicity Glossary"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"A<\/a><\/p>\n

Originally written as “Sticky Terms” by Hess Sakal in 2007. Significantly revised in late 2023 by Hess Sakal, Yavari Caralize, and Vova Romanov.<\/em><\/p>\n

Headmates. Alters. Parts. Fictives. Personalities. Fragments. People.<\/strong><\/em> Online multiplicity jargon\u2014a combination of clinical argot and community-created terms\u2014can be bewildering for neophytes. Multiples, professionals, and allies often use different words, and it\u2019s difficult to tell which terms to use. We\u2019ve created a glossary for curious newbies to get a handle on the dizzying amount of jargon they\u2019ll come across on social media and forums, or in chatrooms.<\/p>\n

This list is neither exhaustive nor objective; it is based on the view of one plural system<\/a> that has been active in the community since the mid-2000s. The plural subculture we joined was more divided in some ways than it is now\u2014in the past, there were distinctions between \u201cnatural\u201d (now frequently called \u201cendogenic\u201d) multiples, trauma-origin systems who met criteria for DID or MPD diagnoses, and soulbonders (a mostly defunct subculture that has now been subsumed by the online multi community). We were too late for the Usenet communities, but we didn\u2019t learn about multiplicity on TikTok, either.<\/p>\n

In general, we hate medicalised terms that reduce all<\/strong> system members to parts or aspects of a single broken or fragmented person, rather than separate people using the same cognitive resources differently. This is because our system doesn\u2019t work that way. The majority of us have solid senses of self\u2014and if we dissociate, we\u2019re more likely to feel singular<\/em>, rather than plural; we think that vibrant separateness is our natural state. We see our plurality as part of our neurodiversity, and we reject medicalised language for our system in the same way that we reject something like “person with autism spectrum disorder.” Terms that treat all system members as parts, ego states, or personalities of a broken self are reductive and fail to understand how culture, neurodivergence and creative experiences can influence how people perceive themselves. Also, even the DSM-5<\/em> 1<\/a><\/sup>acknowledges that not all multiplicity is pathological, thanks to the addition of Criterion C, which did not exist in the previous version of the manual.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Table of Contents<\/p>\nToggle<\/span><\/path><\/svg><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n